Duke of Sussex : "potentially initiate a partial return to the royal fold"

[ThatAvidViewer]

Duke of Sussex asks former aides to help plot RETURN from his US exile in first stage of 'rehabilitation' strategy: Prince's friends vow to help smooth path back and dub it 'Operation Bring Harry In From The Cold' | Daily Mail Online

After everything he has said and done........

Or was it his great-grandmother the Queen Mother?

I know. They really need to have a huge banner disclaimer across the titles.

I do wonder if Margaret's reluctance to give up her place in the succession was influenced by the familial fall-out of her uncle's abdication, which was looked upon as an appalling dereliction of duty which caused his brother's (Margaret's father's) death from cancer.

Quite and Margaret could have married Townsend. She didn't want to give up her title and lifestyle.

I do wish people would at least fact check before they tell us how wrong we are!

ET put hands up and admit I didn't know the info re Margaret's title outlined above. I will iron my ears! I certainly think she didn't want the loss of the life she knew, though.

Most irritating.

<Writers of the Crown, reading MN, kicking themselves they didn't add a third sister into their fantasy storyline, wondering if they can shoehorn this into the next series...>

😂

So you don't think eg Harry's book (etc) has caused any of the trouble at all?

Or all their interviews, or the Netflix series....

It is a bit irksome when posters are talking bollocks and being unpleasant. One or the other is bad enough but the two simultaneously, urgh. One of the Queen's sisters ffs.

Maybe Meghan can play the Queen's secret second sister in the next series of the Crown?

😂
Maybe there could be a dramatic scene where Meghan points out how to improve the weekly meeting with the Prime Minister, through the lens of philanthropic endeavour and collaborative initiatives.

"Tabloid writes unfalsifiable silly-season story about man who once sued them" shocker.

(I have no time for any of these people, FWIW.)

I think it's bollocks.

Pure, unadulterated silly season bollocks.

There are always filler articles of this sort over the summer - starts with the will they/won't they Balmoral stories, and when that runs out of steam, it becomes "what's a new angle on reconciliation"

I don't put any credence on any of them

It's too easy to blame everything on trauma, lots of people have been through trauma in life, not all of them behave like selfish twats

Sometime it's time to grown up, own your behaviour and make changes . If anyone can access the best support and help then it will be Harry

I thought he hardly ever went to Balmoral? He certainly hasn't been there since he married Meghan. He's also only spent brief periods in Africa.

I don't think Balmoral would be/would have been Meghan's cup of tea at all. As far as I can make out he still went to Balmoral regularly prior to his engagement and marriage to Meghan.

I can't believe how naive and how badly advised H&M have been.
Or maybe they were advised differently but chose to ignore it - in which case they are stupid.

All they had to do was wait a few years until the Queen died and then maybe some of their ideas could have been a reality.

They should have realised that no substantial change would happen whilst the Queen was still on the throne

Although Margaret certainly had her rackety moments which were well publicised even back then, she didn't rubbish her family publically and wage war against her sister/Monarch. I don't think she was a particularly happy woman, perhaps she did resent being in second place, but how you deal with these things has at least in part got to be down to personality. The oft given example of Anne is valid.

I’m not sure I agree with you. It’s commonly and widely reported that both William and Charles were dead set against them monetising being royal, in fact in spare harry makes the queen sound like a feeble old woman just agreeing with them, which is clearly more Harry nonsense, but simply he wants to blame his dad and brother, not her. They were all aligned. The queen dying would have changed nothing.

snd they are not poorly advised or naive. They have had some of the top advisors in the world. Who have reported they don’t listen. They only listen to each other.

its arrogance, entitlement and self grandiosing.

I've said before on these threads - if Margaret had posted on the Relationships board 'I'm 23 years old. I'm in love with a divorced man sixeen years older than me who has two children. We want to get married, but my sister has asked us to wait a while. Our beloved father died last year, and as a family we are still adjusting to the great changes this has brought,' everyone would be telling her to listen to her sister.

Grieving and traumatised children were forced to walk behind their mother's coffin in front of a mass of wailing strangers. What sort of family makes kids do that?

You mean what sort of Prime Minister. It was reportedly Tony Blair's idea.

What the family wanted to do was keep the boys in the privacy of Balmoral for as long as possible. It was that 'mass of wailing strangers' that demanded they all come back to London.

I think it a great pity that Harry has so little interest in history, even that of his own family, because he could have learned something from the words of his many times great grandfather (Spencer side) Charles I, meeting his children for the last time. He could have learned how the succession actually works and what is expected

"Charles then turned his attention to the eight-year-old boy sitting on his knee. For little Henry, his message was direct and uncompromising. ‘Sweetheart,' he said, ‘now they will cut off thy father's head; mark, child, what I say.' By this time, the king certainly had his youngest son's complete, even fascinated, attention. ‘They will cut off my head, and perhaps make thee a king; but mark what I say, you must not be a king, so long as your brothers, Charles and James, do live; for they will cut off thy brothers' heads (when they can catch them), and cut off thy head too at last; and therefore I charge you do not be made a king by them.' To which the child, anguished but unshaken by this gruesome depiction of his family's and his own future, burst out: ‘I will be torn in pieces first.' His reply ‘made the king rejoice exceedingly'.

(From "Royal Renegades" by Linda Porter. Charles' words well recorded at the time)

but simply he wants to blame his dad and brother, not her.

Because Harry wanted to try to stay on side with his granny (who controlled the purse strings, held the power, and whom he has completely convinced himself loved him the most of all her grandchildren).

Now the blame has shifted to William and William alone, with Charles wanting to reconcile, but afraid of William's reaction.

Any betting that, when William is monarch, it will be Catherine who is the big baddy grudge bearer, stopping him from reconciling with Harry and allowing George the much needed support of his uncle.

It's a media game being played from Montecito.

Yes indeed. Totally manipulative.

She was famously extremely loyal to her sister.

I absolutely agree with this. I can’t believe how transparent it is that they want to curry favour with the person who is in charge. I’m still left wondering if the original alleged “racist” remarks about any potential children didn’t actually come from Prince Philip. They were so quick to insist it wasn’t him or the late Queen after the Oprah interview. It still strikes me as odd that it would be a conversation involving Charles and Catherine. It seems that they (or Meghan at
least) will take any opportunity to have a swipe at the Princess of Wales.